A. Considering the circumstances where the Defendant, at the time of misunderstanding the fact, bucks by the victim who was the Defendant at the time of the Defendant’s fraudulent act and walked with buckbucks, it should be deemed that the illegality is excluded as an act that does not contravene social rules.

The contents of injury that the defendant suffered by the victim cannot be recognized.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found guilty of the facts charged is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the defendant's assertion of facts was also the same in the court below, but it can be acknowledged that the victim suffered injury, such as her escape, etc. due to the assault by the defendant for about three weeks. Thus, the judgment of the court below to the same purport is justifiable [it is alleged that the defendant's act in this case constitutes a legitimate act, but it does not violate the "social rules" under Article 20 of the Criminal Act refers to the act permissible in light of the overall legal order or social ethics or social norms surrounding it, and it is reasonable to recognize such a legitimate act, first, the motive or purpose of the act, second, the reasonableness of the means or method of the act, the balance between the legal interests of protection and infringement, fourth, urgency, and fifth, there is no other means or method than the act, and the defendant's act in this case's act cannot be considered as an act in violation of Article 468 of the Criminal Act and thus, it does not violate the social norms of the defendant (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do468, Sept. 30, 20, 200).

B. Sentencing;